Points 74.48: Clinical Practice Evaluation 2S

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S
Patricia Gayer 20320640

TEACHER CANDIDATE NAME______________________________ STUDENT NUMBER____________________
Master of Education in Special Education

PROGRAM: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SPD-590 2/7/2019 5/22/2019

COURSE: _____________________________________________________ START DATE: ____________________________ END DATE: _____________________
James Workman Middle School

COOPERATING SCHOOL NAME: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
California
SCHOOL STATE: ___________________________________
Tommi Jones
COOPERATING TEACHER/MENTOR NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Donna Powell
GCU FACULTY SUPERVISOR NAME: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

EVALUATION 2S TOTAL
POINTS 74.48 points 74.48 %
23 2,300.00 1713 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0
100
0 0 0 0 0

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

No Evidence Ineffective Foundational Emerging Proficient Distinguished
(The GCU Faculty (Teacher Candidates within (Teacher Candidates within (Teacher Candidates within (Target level for Teacher (Usually reserved for master
Supervisor should create a this range require a this range require a this range may benefit from a Candidates) Teacher Candidates)
plan with the Teacher Professional Growth Plan) Professional Growth Plan) Professional Growth Plan)
Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
No Evidence 1 to 49 50 to 69 70 to 79 80 to 92 93 to 100
There is no evidence that The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the The performance of the
the performance of the Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate is Teacher Candidate meets Teacher Candidate
Teacher Candidate met this insufficient in meeting this underdeveloped in meeting developing in meeting this this standard and consistently exceeds this
standard or expectations standard and expectations this standard and standard and expectations for expectations for a Teacher standard and all
for a Teacher Candidate for a Teacher Candidate expectations for a Teacher a Teacher Candidate during Candidate during student expectations for a Teacher
during student teaching. during student teaching. Candidate during student student teaching. teaching. Candidate during student
teaching. teaching.
Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

1.1
Teacher candidates create developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account individual students’ 75 1.00
strengths, interests, and needs and enables each student to advance and accelerate his or her learning.
1.2
Teacher candidates collaborate with families, communities, colleagues, and other professionals to promote 75
student growth and development. 1.00
Evidence
(The GCU Faculty Supervisor should detail the evidence or lack of evidence from the Teacher Candidate in meeting this standard. For lack of evidence, please provide suggestions
for improvement and the actionable steps for growth. )
Ms Gayer under the direction of the cooperating teacher, Ms. Jones, created a station rotation activity that placed students into three small groups. Ms. Gayer, planned the
activity and then collaborated with the adult staff to promote student academic growth and development.
Ms Gayer is receiving high quality support from her cooperating teacher, Ms. Jones. The cooperating teacher is providing sound instruction for differentiating instruction,
working with the strength of students and helping Ms. Gayer recognize and address the needs of the students.


Candidate to determine
how the Teacher Candidate
will meet this standard in
future evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

2.1
Teacher candidates design, adapt, and deliver instruction to address each student’s diverse learning strengths 75 1.00
and needs and create opportunities for students to demonstrate their learning in different ways.
2.2
Teacher candidates incorporate language development tools into planning and instruction, including strategies
for making content accessible to English language students and for evaluating and supporting their 75 1.00
development of English proficiency.
2.3
Teacher candidates access resources, supports, specialized assistance and services to meet particular learning 75 1.00
differences or needs.
Evidence
Ms. Gayer, under the direction of Ms. Jones, designed the station rotation activity and was able to adapt the instruction for address the diverse learning strengths and needs of
the students.
Ms. Gayer incorporated language development into the planning and instruction. Ms. Gayer was able to incorporate strategies into the English development class.
The teacher candidate is able to access and will utilize resources, supports and services to meet the learning needs of her students.


Candidate to determine how
the Teacher Candidate will
meet this standard in future
evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

3.1
Teacher candidates manage the learning environment to actively and equitably engage students by organizing, 75 1.00
allocating, and coordinating the resources of time, space, and students’ attention.
3.2
Teacher candidates communicate verbally and nonverbally in ways that demonstrate respect for and
responsiveness to the cultural backgrounds and differing perspectives students bring to the learning
75
1.00
environment.
Evidence
Ms. Gayer, with the support from her cooperating teacher, organized the learning environment by setting up learning stations and utilized the classroom staff to facilitate
instruction. One of the stations used technology to practice SBAC vocabulary.
Ms. Gayer communicates respectfully to students and adults.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

4.1
Teacher candidates stimulate student reflection on prior content knowledge, link new concepts to familiar 75 1.00
concepts, and make connections to students’ experiences.
4.2
Teacher candidates use supplementary resources and technologies effectively to ensure accessibility and 75 1.00
relevance for all students.
4.3
Teacher candidates create opportunities for students to learn, practice, and master academic language in their 75 1.00
content area.
Evidence
Ms Gayer is able with the assistance of her cooperating teacher, is able to stimulate student learning by connecting prior knowledge to new concepts. She uses
supplementary resources and technology to effectively enhance the learning experience for her students. Ms. Gayer embraces opportunities for students to learn and
practice language skills to help ensure mastery.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

5.1
Teacher candidates engage students in applying content knowledge to real-world problems through the lens of
interdisciplinary themes (e.g., financial literacy, environmental literacy).
✔ 0.00
5.2
Teacher candidates facilitate students’ ability to develop diverse social and cultural perspectives that expand
their understanding of local and global issues and create novel approaches to solving problems.
Evidence
✔ 0.00
The teacher candidate during this observation did not address real-world problems through interdisciplinary themes.
The teacher candidate during this observation did not address local or global issues.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

6.1
1.00
Teacher candidates design assessments that match learning objectives with assessment methods and minimize 75
sources of bias that can distort assessment results.
6.2
Teacher candidates work independently and collaboratively to examine test and other performance data to 75 1.00
understand each student’s progress and to guide planning.
6.3
Teacher candidates prepare all students for the demands of particular assessment formats and make
appropriate modifications in assessments or testing conditions especially for students with disabilities and 75 1
language learning needs.
Evidence
Ms. Gayer under the direction of her cooperating teacher, is learning to use assessment results to help drive instruction. Since she is new to the field of education, and is actively
learning how to match data to instruction.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

7.1
Teacher candidates plan how to achieve each student’s learning goals, choosing appropriate strategies and 70 1.00
accommodations, resources, and materials to differentiate instruction for individuals and groups of students.
7.2
Teacher candidates develop appropriate sequencing of learning experiences and provide multiple ways to 70 1.00
demonstrate knowledge and skill.
7.3
Teacher candidates plan for instruction based on formative and summative assessment data, prior student 70 1.00
knowledge, and student interest.
Evidence
The cooperating teacher, Ms. Jones is actively teaching Ms. Gayer how to use assessment data to plan for instruction.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

8.1
Teacher candidates vary their role in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in 75 1.00
relation to the content, purpose of instruction, and student needs
8.2
Teacher candidates engage students in using a range of learning skills and technology tools to access, interpret, 75 1.00
evaluate, and apply information.
8.3
Teacher candidates ask questions to stimulate discussion that serve different purposes (e.g., probing for
student understanding, helping students articulate their ideas and thinking processes, stimulating curiosity,
78
1.00
and helping students to question).
Evidence
Ms. Gayer is learning how to vary her role in the instructional process. Since she is new to the field of education, she needs to continue to learn from her cooperating teacher
and co-workers. Ms. Gayer has possesses talent and is able to use learning strategies to engage students.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

9.1
Independently and in collaboration with colleagues, teacher candidates use a variety of data (e.g., systematic 1.00
observation, information about students, and research) to evaluate the outcomes of teaching and learning and 75
to adapt planning and practice.
9.2
Teacher candidates actively seek professional, community, and technological resources, within and outside the 75 1.00
school, as supports for analysis, reflection, and problem solving.
Evidence
Under the supervision of the cooperating teacher, Ms. Jones, the teacher candidate participates in parent conferences and IEP meetings. She is learning to use student work
samples, behavior documentation and test assessment results when planning for instruction. Ms. Gayer seeks professional resources within the school and through outside
resources; college, GCU supervisor, etc.


evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

10.1
Teacher candidates use technological tools and a variety of communication strategies to build local and global 75 1.00
learning communities that engage students, families, and colleagues.
10.2
Teacher candidates advocate to meet the needs of students, to strengthen the learning environment, and to 75 1.00
enact system change.
Evidence
Under the supervision and direction of the cooperating teacher, Ms. Gayer is learning to use technological tools to help engage students and to build community.
Ms. Gayer strives to stay in-tune with the students so she can recognize and advocate for their individual needs.

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

evaluations)
teaching. teaching.
Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Teacher candidates demonstrate an understanding of their impact on student learning as evidenced in the
Student Teaching Evaluation of Performance (STEP) and other formative and summative assessments. 75 1.00
Evidence
Ms. Gayer is under the direct supervision of her cooperating teacher. Ms. Gayer is in the emerging stages of her professional development. Ms. Gayer understands that her
role has a major impact on her students. She has quickly gained rapport with the students and school staff.
Ms. Gayer is new to the classroom, and is emerging as an educator. Under the direction of her cooperating teacher, Ms. Gayer should be able to reach the proficiency level
by the end of her clinical practice.
Ms. Gayer needs to understand the high level of responsibility and commitment that is involved with successful completion of the program and becoming a credentialed
teacher.

INSTRUCTIONS
Please review the "Total Scored Percentage" for accuracy and add any attachments before completing the "Agreement and Signature" section.
Total Scored Percentage:

74.48 %
ATTACHMENTS
Clinical Practice Time Log:
(Required)
Attachment 1:
(Optional)
Attachment 2:
(Optional)
AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

This evaluation reflects the results of a collaborative conference including feedback from the Cooperating / Mentor Teacher. The GCU Faculty Supervisor and
Cooperating /Mentor Teacher should collaboratively review the performance in each category prior to the evaluation meeting.
I attest this submission is accurate, true, and in compliance with GCU policy guidelines, to the best of my ability to do so.
GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date
Donna Powell (May 1, 2019) May 1, 2019

Inference
Excerpt from
By Stephenie Meyer
Twilight Breaking Dawn 1
I'd had more than my fair share of near-death experiences; it wasn't something you ever really got used to.
It seemed oddly inevitable, though, facing death again. Like I really was marked for disaster. I'd escaped
time and time again, but it kept coming back for me. Still, this time was so different from the others. You
could run from someone you feared, you could try to fight someone you hated. All my reactions were
geared toward those kinds of killers the monsters, the enemies. When you loved the one who was killing
you, it left you no options. How could you run, how could you fight when doing so would hurt that
beloved one? If your life was all you had to give your beloved, how could you not give it? If it was
someone you truly loved?
Part A: What can you conclude from the text?
A) The narrator is unsure about who she loves.

B) The narrator is fighting for her life.
C) The narrator struggles with giving her life for the one she loves.
D) The narrator is unable to choose.
Part B: Which sentence from the text best supports your answer in Part A?
A) I'd escaped time and time again, but it kept coming back for me.
B) All my reactions were geared toward those kinds of killers the monsters, the enemies.
C) Still, this time was so different from the others.
D) If your life was all you had to give your beloved, how could you not give it?
Short Answer: How is the narrator feeling in the text? Support your answer with details from the text.
SBAC Vocabulary Sketch Notes
Word Your Definition

(What does the word Sketch
mean?) (The academic doodle -
Your picture or symbol
to help you remember)!
Designed by Catlin Tucker
@Catlin_Tucker
CatlinTucker.com
Time in each station: 15 minutes
Cue to move: Jeopardy Music (30-second cue)
Tech needed: Chromebooks & Headphones
Station #1 (On-line): Flocabulary - Test-Taking Vocabulary & Station #2 (teacher-led): SBAC Task - Inference Passage & RACES
Cornell Notes Objective/Skill: Target 1: Key Details
Objective/Skill: Target 3: Word Meanings R. 6.1, 7.1, & 8.1 - Cite textual evidence to support analysis of what
RL.6.4, 7.4, 8.4 - Determine the meaning of words and phrases as the text explicitly says as well inferences drawn from the text.
they are used in a text, including figurative and connotative Practice inferences and answering questions in the SBAC format.
meanings, analyze the impact of specific word choices on meaning Description: Students will read a short excerpt and and practice
and tone. making an inference and answering three questions - a multiple
SL.6.1 Interpret information presented in diverse media and choice question, an evidence-based selected response, and a short
formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively, orally) and explain how it answer question.
contributes to a topic, text, or issue under study. Supplies: Prompt, questions, RACES template, & pencil.
Build context and practice determining meaning of test-taking
words and phrases.
Description: Students will watch a Flipped Classroom video giving
instructions to use to the Cornell Note taking method while
watching a Flocabulary video on test-taking vocabulary. Students
will be instructed to pause the video and define the ten words that
are mentioned during the lesson.
Supplies: Chromebook, headphones, notebook paper, pencil, and
highlighters.
Station #3(Off-line): SBAC Vocabulary & Sketch Notes Start of Class:

Objective/Skill: Target 3: Word Meanings Students will be greeted at the door, daily agenda check will be
RL.6.4, 7.4, & 8.4 - Determine the meaning of words and phrases as completed, and an overview of the stations and the group order will
they are used in a text, including figurative and connotative be conducted prior to the start of the rotation. The groups will be
meanings, analyze the impact of specific word choices on meaning cued to move with the start of the Jeopardy music.
and tone.
L.6.6, 7.6, & 8.6 - Acquire and use accurately grade-appropriate
general academic and domain-specific words and phrases; gather
vocabulary knowledge when considering a word or phrase
important to comprehension or expression.
Review vocabulary, practice writing definitions, and create a
drawing/symbol sketch to emphasise meaning of word.
Description: Students will review SBAC vocabulary list and fill out a
three-section chart with the word, definition, and an image that
reflects the meaning of the word.
Supplies: Vocabulary list/chart, pencil, markers, and colored
pencils.

Points 74.48: Clinical Practice Evaluation 2S

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Points 74.48: Clinical Practice Evaluation 2S

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

CLINICAL PRACTICE EVALUATION 2S

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Master of Education in Special Education

SPD-590 2/7/2019 5/22/2019

James Workman Middle School

FOR COURSE INSTRUCTORS ONLY:

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 1: Student Development Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 2: Learning Differences Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 3: Learning Environments Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 4: Content Knowledge Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 5: Application of Content Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 6: Assessment Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Scoring Guide

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning

Grand Canyon University: Impact on Student Learning Score No Evidence

Patricia Gayer 20320640

Total Scored Percentage:

AGREEMENT AND SIGNATURE

GCU Faculty Supervisor E-Signature Date

Donna Powell (May 1, 2019) May 1, 2019

Twilight Breaking Dawn 1

Part A: What can you conclude from the text?

A) The narrator is unsure about who she loves.

Word Your Definition

Station #3(Off-line): SBAC Vocabulary & Sketch Notes Start of Class:

Anda mungkin juga menyukai